I am an attorney licensed to practice in CA and CO who currently teaches Sports Law and Sports Governance at the University of Miami. I founded RulingSports.com in 2011 and since then have appeared on hundreds of television and radio shows internationally to provide commentary and analysis on sports law and sports business issues. Along with writing for Forbes, I cover sports for The Huffington Post and blog about life as a 20-something at www.aliciajessop.com.

How Cutting Wrestling From the Olympics May Impact NCAA Wrestling for the Best

Wrestling fans and sports fans alike were surprised on Tuesday when the IOC voted to cut wrestling from the 2020 Olympic program. While this vote does not absolutely preclude wrestling from being part of the 2020 Olympic program, as the sport can now petition to be one of the last sports to be added to the program, wrestling faces a tough battle for Olympic inclusion. What kind of impact does NCAA wrestling face as a result of the IOC’s decision?

The path NCAA wrestling has charted over the last 41 years–since the imposition of Title IX–has been well documented. Title IX, passed in 1972 and affecting college athletic departments receiving federal funding since 1978, ”prohibits sex discrimination in any educational program or activity receiving any type of federal financial aid.” Related to sports, this required NCAA programs that receive federal funding to provide equal athletic opportunities to men and women. Many argue that the implementation of Title IX was the impetus for the disbandment of many NCAA wrestling programs nationwide.

While there are arguably reasons outside of Title IX–including but not limited to: budget cuts, fan participation and alumni support–why NCAA wrestling programs have been cut nationwide, the numbers are somewhat startling. In 2011-12, wrestling was the men’s sport that had the highest net number of teams that were dropped by NCAA institutions, with a net loss of four teams. To put this number in perspective, the men’s sport with the next highest net loss in 2011-12 was bowling, which had a net loss of one team.

Since 1988-89–one decade after colleges had to comply with Title IX–wrestling has had the greatest net loss of men’s sports teams, with a net loss of 108. It’s important to note that wrestling is not the only sport suffering teams being cut, as in 2011-12, there were a total of 68 NCAA men’s teams and 46 women’s teams cut nationwide. Since 1988-89, 2,816 men’s teams have been cut. Throughout the years, though, wrestling at the collegiate level has suffered a steady decline. In 1981-82, there were 146 Division I wrestling teams, with 3,659 student-athletes participating in the sport. By 2011-12, those numbers dropped to 77 Division I teams with 2,438 student-athletes.

While these numbers and the IOC’s decision are arguably bad news for the sport of wrestling, neither factors into the sport being irreparably harmed at a collegiate level. For starters, the all-time single session crowd record was set in 2012, when 18,919 people attended the 2012 Division I Wrestling Championship finals. Last year’s tournament set a record for attendance, as 112,393 people in total attended the six sessions held in St. Louis. While St. Louis is located geographically close to several wrestling hotbeds, these numbers arguably show that wrestling can draw significantly large crowds.

Coaches and athletics directors also do not believe that the IOC’s decision will have a significantly adverse impact on collegiate wrestling. “I can’t say that it necessarily is going to hurt college wrestling. People don’t wrestle at the collegiate level because they want to be an Olympian. They wrestle because it’s a great sport that they’ve participated in since they were kids,” said Cornell University’s head wrestling coach, Rob Koll. “I don’t see a growth or reduction in college wrestling because of this. There is no athletics director who is building their program around Olympic participation in wrestling. College wrestling is about education and leadership.” Another top wrestling program, Stanford, iterated its commitment to its wrestling program in the wake of the IOC’s decision. “From Stanford’s viewpoint, we fully support wrestling and will continue to do so. We are obviously disappointed with the IOC’s decision, but are encouraged by the recent health of college wrestling. There is very strong support in the community for college wrestling. I don’t anticipate that will change,” said Stanford’s associate athletics director of business strategy, Kevin Blue.

Koll also stresses two other factors when explaining why the IOC’s decision will likely have a minimal impact on NCAA wrestling. First, the type of wrestling engaged in during the Olympics, freestyle, is different than that wrestled at the collegiate level. “It’s almost two different sports, as far as I see it. A lot of kids who wrestle collegiately don’t even wrestle freestyle,” Koll noted. Additionally, Koll has little fear that wrestling’s non-existence in the 2020 Olympic program will stimy young people’s interest in the sport. When asked how wrestling not being televised during the Olympics could hurt the sport’s growth, Koll said, “I don’t think seeing the sport of wrestling on television two to three nights a year, once every four years, is that significant for the sport’s growth.”

From a global standpoint, there are concerns as to how the IOC’s decision affects third-world and developing nations. As one of the world’s oldest sports, wrestling is also one of the most inexpensive sports to compete in as minimal equipment is required. Given this, nations globally can compete on somewhat equal ground in the sport. This factor is one which struck Koll the most. “People in every country can wrestle. The last time I looked around, there weren’t a lot of great fencers in Ethiopia. I don’t remember a lot of rhythmic dancers coming out of the Congo. Wrestling has universal appeal and is inexpensive.” Koll summed his feelings up on this issue as follows, “I think it’s a travesty. What I think is sad, is you are taking the opportunity away from nations to represent their country.”

For a sport that has seen its up’s and down’s over the last half century, the IOC’s decision could be seen as a huge blow. However, it could also be seen as the kick wrestling needed to revitalize the sport. The IOC’s decision spurred immense conversation and debate as to the sport’s role in current sports culture. This dialogue arguably would never have occurred had the IOC not taken its brash and unsupported decision. Perhaps, then, being cut from the Olympic program was the push wrestling needed to keep its sport alive.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

With the IOC, moves like this all come down to special interests. There were several sports on the table to be cut from the program. Ultimately, one that surprisingly wasn’t cut–pentathlon–had its interests represented at the table during the vote.